I have been saying this for months...it is easy to be mad at something. But Tea Partiers and the GOP don't really seem to have answers beyond the rage. I would love a GOP party that actually made any kind of sense to keep the left from being so fringe.

---

Under the Obama administration, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has spent much of his time playing the role of the go-to yet mercurial Republican negotiator. It's a function previously carried out by his mentor, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), and one that can exact a taxing political cost (see McCain's inability to rally conservatives in 2008 and his subsequent trek rightward during his own reelection campaign).

In a just-published New York Times magazine profile, Graham seems to revel in the part. The senator, who has been censured by conservatives in his home state, fully cops to enjoying the political spotlight on testy legislative matters, whether detention policy, immigration reform, or climate change legislation. He also mocks his Tea Party detractors as having no long-term vision or prospects for political viability. He openly touts the closeness of his relationship to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, and even acknowledges the cynicism of McCain's new, non-maverick label.

Penned by Robert Draper -- who wrote some of the more entertaining narratives from the 2008 campaign trail -- the whole piece is worth a read (Draper even broaches the gay rumors that have followed Graham for years). But here are some of the relevant parts.

ON THE TEA PARTY'S CRITICISM OF GRAHAM:

In years past, Graham's deal-making forays typically featured his close friend, Senator John McCain of Arizona, as the frontman. Nowadays McCain has shucked his maverick ways in order to court his state's G.O.P. primary voters, while Graham's reflexive displays of bipartisanship have made him something of a scourge among South Carolina Tea Partiers. Harry Kibler fingered Graham as major prey in Kibler's "RINO hunt" (Republicans in Name Only). The South Carolina chapter of Resist.net warns constituents that Graham "is up to his old reach-across-the-aisle tricks again!" Among the conservative activists who have called for censuring Graham as a quisling of the right is the state's G.O.P. gubernatorial nominee and Tea Party favorite, Nikki Haley.

"Everything I'm doing now in terms of talking about climate, talking about immigration, talking about Gitmo is completely opposite of where the Tea Party movement's at," Graham said as Cato drove him to the city of Greenwood, where he was to give a commencement address at Lander University later that morning. On four occasions, Graham met with Tea Party groups. The first, in his Senate office, was "very, very contentious," he recalled. During a later meeting, in Charleston, Graham said he challenged them: " 'What do you want to do? You take back your country -- and do what with it?' . . . Everybody went from being kind of hostile to just dead silent."

In a previous conversation, Graham told me: "The problem with the Tea Party, I think it's just unsustainable because they can never come up with a coherent vision for governing the country. It will die out." Now he said, in a tone of casual lament: "We don't have a lot of Reagan-type leaders in our party. Remember Ronald Reagan Democrats? I want a Republican that can attract Democrats." Chortling, he added, "Ronald Reagan would have a hard time getting elected as a Republican today."

As a turncoat and a phoney, of course he is praying people stop paying attention. He is exactly the kind of politician that has their job on the chopping block when people start watching legislators and holding them accountable.

Even his state Republican party has censured him.

He votes for amnesty, he votes for carbon caps and other handouts to the enviroglomerates, he cozied up to the OA at the height of their popularity (Jan 2009).

He's got no soul and no prayer unless people got back to being asleep at the polls. Wishful thinking.

I'll bet Obama/Axlerod/Emmanuel were uttering the very same words in 2009.

Scott Brown has helped Democrats pass several key pieces of legislation. In February, he voted with the majority party to pass an important jobs bill. And Brown's vote gave Democrats the edge to break a filibuster on financial reform legislation.

Scott Brown has helped Democrats pass several key pieces of legislation. In February, he voted with the majority party to pass an important jobs bill. And Brown's vote gave Democrats the edge to break a filibuster on financial reform legislation.

I take it your point is the tea party is what got Brown elected? Which isn't the case of course.

What the democrats need to worry about is consumer confidence is in the tank, Obama's own debt/deficit commission isn't going to amount to anything except partisan bickering, and the economy is perched to take another nose dive into a beaker full of water.

All of which will just add fuel to the tea party movement. You and Lindsey can pretend to ignore them at your own peril.

I take it your point is the tea party is what got Brown elected? Which isn't the case of course.

What the democrats need to worry about is consumer confidence is in the tank, Obama's own debt/deficit commission isn't going to amount to anything except partisan bickering, and the economy is perched to take another nose dive into a beaker full of water.

All of which will just add fuel to the tea party movement. You and Lindsey can pretend to ignore them at your own peril.

All I heard after he was elected was what a great victory for the tea party it was. Now all I hear is crickets about the guy.